ABSTRACT

The study evaluated the Unified Agricultural Extension Service (UAES) which adopted the Training and Visit (T&V) management system in Abia and Akwa Ibom States of Nigeria. It filled a gap in knowledge by evaluating the features of T&V that has been put in place as a basis for rightly judging the effectiveness of the system. The sample comprised 86 extension staff and 280 Representative Contact Farmers (ROEs) and Other Contact Farmers (OCFs) selected through multi-staged stratified random sampling procedure from zones, blocks, circles, and sub circles. Three data-collection instruments were adapted but their psychometric properties were ascertained through analysis of data from pretesting the instruments to subjects similar to the study sample. The reliability coefficients were between .76 and .83, and.72 respectively. Documentary sources, observation, ADP annual reports and interviews were supportive of data collected with the 3 instruments. Data generated were analyzed using descriptive and non-parametric statistics. Among others, it was found that: Abia and Akwa Ibom ADPs have put in place some of the key features of T&V management system at medium levels, but field! farm orientation and liaison with input agencies were at low and very low levels respectively. On the aggregate, both ADPs achieved medium level of effectiveness, which implied that a directly proportional relationship existed between the levels of key features of T&V put in place and effectiveness indices. Among the various programme subsectors, significant differences existed in the mean numbers of MTRM topics, SPATs, radio broadcast programmes and recommendations adopted by farmers. The differences were consistently in favour of crop subsector while Fisheries was least favoured. Although the two ADPs have put UAES in place, the conditions of service of both staff from Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and those recruited by the ADPs have yet to be harmonized. While it is commendable that the ADPs have extended activities to cover all agricultural sub-sectors, the crop sub—sector took the lion share of extension efforts at the expense of non-crop sub-sectors. The numbers of information sources used by farmers, production recommendations that farmers leant from EAs and perceived regularity of EAs visits were significantly related to effectiveness of UAES. Both ADPs are moving toward professionalism as they have reduced EA: FF ratios to 1:1450 on the average but about 14.4% of field staff do not have the minimum OND entry qualification. There were deviations from the single line of command and efforts are being diluted with involvement of front line staff in non-extension work. Large percentages of RCFs and OCFs have significant direct exposure to extension but that large percentage (about 44%) of RCFs xu reported that EAs visited them outside the farm/field as stipulated in T&V system. Based on these findings, it was recommended that: The two ADPs should maintain and improve upon the medium levels already attained in establishment of the key features of T&V management system. To the extent that the findings point to poor implementation rather than a faulty system, no attempt should be made to replace UAES with esoteric approach, as this would introduce turbulence and ripples in agricultural extension practice in these states. The levels of the key features of T&V put in place should be increased to ensure greater effectiveness. They should completely professionalize extension; recruit more front-line staff recruited and the conditions of service of both categories of staff in the ADPs harmonized. The ADPs should revert to single line of command for all cadres of extension staff, and increase extension effort, activities and attention in the non—crop sub sectors. The WIA and Media Support should be treated as SMS areas.